'Families living in the countryside must bring in £13,740 a year — or £264 a week — more than those living in the city just to get by, Money Mail research has found.quote]Absolute bilge. Total garbage. Some people in the countryside don't even earn 13,740 quid a year, never mind an extra 13,740.There's a clue to the stupidity of it where it says "Money Mail research has found".....

Thye failed to mention housing costs. Bet a 3 bed in central powys is cheaper than equivalent house in London.

But aside from that £13,740 more on insurance, yada yada...???!!!..My total household bills ( ex food) are only £3000 per year plus £1500 on petrol, and that's for a 4 bed house. I think someone got their decimal point in the wrong place.

Someone mentioned the school run... thing is, as I keep mentioning, there's 1) living in the middle of frickin' nowhere and 2) living in a small town. In my town, population 3000 and surrounded by miles and miles of countryside, there's a primary school and a secondary school. Indeed apart from those who come in from surrounding villages, almost all pupils walk or cycle to school as it's near and safe to do so. For those in nearby villages there are dedicated school buses.

I do live "rural" but not ridiculously rural. There are shops, a supermarket, even a swimming pool.. and decent broadband.

I live in the countryside now and only yesterday had a tanker deliver me 500litres of energy dense oil. £335 is all it cost me to get through our cold spell and I doubt we will use much now until December.

We used/spent way more on mains gas when we were townies. Now calor gas f*** me that is expensive. A neighbour up the road converted to this before it became really expensive and pays out £3k a year to heat his similarly sized 3 bed property to ours.

Three good towns within 10miles of me so get the best of both worlds. I wake up to the smell of cow manure and can shop til I drop from home bargains and the like offsetting the 2litres of fuel I need to get me there.

Edited by longtomsilver, 12 April 2012 - 09:41 PM.

10 years ago we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash - Now we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash So, what left? Alcohol.

Someone mentioned the school run... thing is, as I keep mentioning, there's 1) living in the middle of frickin' nowhere and 2) living in a small town. In my town, population 3000 and surrounded by miles and miles of countryside, there's a primary school and a secondary school. Indeed apart from those who come in from surrounding villages, almost all pupils walk or cycle to school as it's near and safe to do so. For those in nearby villages there are dedicated school buses.

I do live "rural" but not ridiculously rural. There are shops, a supermarket, even a swimming pool.. and decent broadband.

That's the thing, I don't think you could describe most places as being definitely 'City' or 'Country'. I don't think there is a definition.

I live in a suburban area on the edge of London, which would fall into the 'City' definition, given that you can walk to everything within a few minutes (station, parks, large town centre etc). It is quite built up.

A few miles away, there is the commuter belt, a 'posher' area which is much less urban, but is still definitely suburban rather than rural (I am sure most of the residents would mutter about how 'countryfied' it is, though!). People who live here will generally drive their kids to school, drive to the supermarket/station/restaurants, compared to a lot of people who live in proper rural towns who have those facilities right on their doorsteps.

It would still cost vastly more to live in this type of area because the increased house prices would outweigh any other savings made.

I'm struggling to believe this. I think what they've done to get to this figure of £13,740 is to take the worst case of every town/country comparison they make. The one that jumps out is the insurance costs:

Some of these homeowners face excesses of £10,000. This is because insurers are increasingly wary about offering flood insurance because a government agreement to boost flood defences is about to run out. Excesses this high can make it difficult for people to get a mortgage.

I think the majority of the countryside does not count as high flood risk, so wouldn't suffer these excesses on their insurance - and £10,000 is the extreme example...so, yes, it's a little more expensive to live in the countryside, but not as much as they are saying for most people.

However, this was the passage that got me:

‘People in the countryside are being clobbered with rising insurance, lower wages and the gradual disappearance of rural shops, forcing them to travel further for even simple items,’ says Barney White-Spunner, executive chairman of campaign group the Countryside Alliance.

‘The countryside isn’t all Downton Abbey — many people are really struggling to get by, yet get little or no relief from the Government.’

So they seem to want their lives subsidised by central government, but when the majority of the nation disapproves of them setting packs of dogs on small animals for fun, they tell us we're ignorant townies who should stay in our towns and mind our own business.

Edited by acer, 15 April 2012 - 01:21 PM.

"We'll never have a proper democracy 'til we start shooting a few people.." A Garnett